couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Release clean-up (delete ALL the branches!)
Date Wed, 08 May 2013 17:26:42 GMT
*Noodles a little while longer...*

In fact, I am not even sure why we recently did that 1.2.2 release.
Unfortunately, I think we got into the habit of thinking that minor version
numbers mean breaking changes. Because, in the past, this has sometimes
been the case. For those people who wanted that fix in the 1.2.2, I should
have said "please upgrade to 1.3". Unless there are breaking changes that I
do not know about? (If there is, please tell me. There is nothing in NEWS
or CHANGES that I can see.)

What are your thoughts on this?


On 8 May 2013 18:06, Joan Touzet <wohali@apache.org> wrote:

> I don't know what the Apache stance is on things, but I'm -1 on deleting
> the 1.2.x branch. "n and n-1" support is fairly common, unless you want
> to consdier n == HEAD and n-1 == 1.3.x.
>
> Otherwise +1.
>
> -Joan
>
> On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 07:34:14PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Devs,
> >
> > We're switching over to time-based releases.
> >
> > I took a moment to review our existing release branches today, and I have
> > prepared a list of recommendations for you. Please review these and give
> me
> > feedback.
> >
> > By "drop support" I mean "make official" and while this is ostensibly the
> > case for a few of these, what I _really_ mean is "delete the branch". I
> see
> > no reason to keep this stuff around. It would make my life a lot easier
> if
> > we could clean this stuff up.
> >
> > I'm not a Git expert, so I am relying on someone to sanity check this.
> > Remember: if we ever want to patch up a security issue in an unsupported
> > release, we will be issuing a patch. So I am assuming what we'll want to
> do
> > is patch against the last tag for that release line. No need for the
> branch
> > at all as far as I can tell.
> >
> > If nobody objects in 72 hours, I will assume lazy consensus and proceed.
> >
> > ## 0.10.x line and before
> >
> > Really old stuff.
> >
> > Recommendation:
> >
> >  * Drop support of these release lines
> >  * Delete the branches
> >
> > ## 0.11.x line
> >
> > First release: March 2010 (three years old)
> >
> > Unreleased changes:
> >
> >   * Fix for frequently edited documents in multi-master deployments being
> >     duplicated in _changes and _all_docs.
> >
> > Recommendation:
> >
> >  * Do not release these changes
> >  * Drop support of this release line
> >  * Delete the branch
> >
> > ## 1.0.x line
> >
> > First release: July 2010 (three years old)
> >
> > No unreleased changes.
> >
> > Recommendation:
> >
> >  * Drop support of this release line
> >  * Delete the branch
> >
> > ## 1.1.x line
> >
> > First release: July 2011 (two years old)
> >
> > No unreleased changes.
> >
> > Recommendation:
> >
> >  * Drop support of this release line
> >  * Delete the branch
> >
> > ## 1.2.x line
> >
> > First release: April 2012 (one year old)
> >
> > No unreleased changes.
> >
> > 1.3.x line is backwards compatible with 1.2.x.
> >
> > Recommendation:
> >
> >  * Drop support of this release line
> >  * Delete the branch
> >
> > ## 1.3.x line
> >
> > First release: April 2013 (one month old)
> >
> > Unreleased changes:
> >
> >  * Whatever bugfixes are on master or in branches right now.
> >
> > Recommendation:
> >
> >  * Release 1.3.1 this month.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --
> > NS
>
> --
> Joan Touzet | joant@atypical.net | wohali everywhere else
>



-- 
NS

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message